On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 09:51:23AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 5:57 PM Segher Boessenkool > <seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 12:21:04PM -0700, sunil.k.pandey via Gcc-patches > > wrote: > > > On Linux/x86_64, > > > > > > c34db4b6f8a5d80367c709309f9b00cb32630054 is the first bad commit > > > commit c34db4b6f8a5d80367c709309f9b00cb32630054 > > > Author: Jan Hubicka <j...@suse.cz> > > > Date: Sat Oct 3 17:20:16 2020 +0200 > > > > > > Track access ranges in ipa-modref > > > > > > caused > > > > [ ... ] > > > > This isn't a patch. Wrong mailing list? > > I view this as a follow up of > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555314.html
But it *isn't* a follow-up of that mail. That is my point. Most of these messages do not finger any particular patch even, I think? > What do people think about this kind of followups? Is this appropriate > for this mailing list? Please just use bugzilla. And report bugs there the way they should be reported: full command lines, full description of the errors, and everything else needed to easily reproduce the problem. *Actually* following up to the patch mail could be useful (but you can than just point to the bugzilla). Sending spam to gcc-patches@ is not useful for most users of the list. Segher
